Kavanaugh Hearing

And do you honestly believe she would have come forward if Kavanaugh was one of Obama's lefty judges?

 

I guess being able to cry on demand takes some time to master.

 

Because he's not a liberal. Any other reason is just bs.

 

Earlier in the thread it was reported she originally brought this out in marriage counseling a couple of years ago.

Depending on how that counseling went, and what she internalized as the right things to do, she may indeed have raised this regardless of partisan politics. Of course it would be Pubs in her corner if it was a nominee from a Dem POTUS.

I have no idea on the veracity of her claims, and I doubt any of us ever will.

I would however be very surprised if she did not honestly believe this happened, even if maybe not exactly as she remembers it. What she is doing is going to be extremely stressful and painful for her to endure and she will likely suffer ongoing remarks/attacks from partisans who resent her for doing this. I doubt she does this lightly.

 

On Kavanaugh's side, he is in a no win position.

Whether or not he's guilty, he and his buddy are going to deny it ever happened, and some people will always look at him as though it did.

 

If all the guys in high school or college were charged with attempted rape for getting overly aggressive with a woman when both were drinking, half the men on this board would probably be guilty.

 

You make a good point... a chit ton of guys have gotten away with sexual assault over the years. Including probably both a recent former POTUS (Clinton) and our current POTUS.

Doesn't make it okay.

 

Do you consider quoting what the guy has said and published to be dragging him thru the mud?

 

Yes.

 

https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/zoetillman/kavanaugh-democrats-lawsuit-documents-archives

 

Then that is terrible.

It probably isnt.

To use your wording, any intelligent person knows why matters like this weren't handled like that. They understand the psychology involved and the issues with law enforcement and sexual assault, especially at the time. They understand that sexual assault is severely under reported and why.

She knows and he knows whether he is innocent. You dont. That is the point of ambiguity. She is not smearing a potentially innocent man. She is either smearing an innocent person, for sure, or is making a true accusation. You and I are the people who dont know which, not her. So her action doesn't fit your description.

 

I would disagree with dan, he's borked.

 

Sad commentary on half the men in this thread, if true. Sad that you agree, @gatorpika

I don't force myself on women who aren't interested or aren't consenting. I wish the same was true of more men.

 

I dont know and neither do you. That is a pretty dumb hypothetical.

 

And there is the problem. And this is one of the reasons women dont report things. Some men think "oh that isnt that big of a deal." And women start thinking, "was this bad enough that I should report it?"

 

Why do they need a former senator to do it and can they even have a former senator do that?

 

None of them want to risk the political blowback inherent in attacking the alleged victim of a sex crime.

 

But, the truth is the truth and it shouldn’t take more than a week to figure that out.

Anyway, just read the letter to the committee, that tells the entire story.

The decide what to do. This is really easy ..... for a normal human being.

 

Man, for you to have this view says a lot.

 

For several reasons:

1. It is much better optics to have another woman questioning Baker than a bunch of older male senators.
2. It is a better use of time, as the one questioner can continue line of questioning rather than jumping around from senator to senator
3. It avoids any stray voltage type questions or questions that could be viewed as inappropriate or smearing.

Yes, they can do that.